Quality of life and impulsivity in bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a chronic psychiatric illness that impairs quality of life (QoL) in numerous life domains even when mood symptoms are not present and is characterized by elevated impulsivity. Many of the comorbid conditions that are associated with diminished QoL in BD also involve impulsivity. The objective of this project was to investigate whether impulsivity might mediate the effects of these comorbid conditions on poor QoL. METHODS: A total of 76 participants diagnosed with bipolar I disorder by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I disorders completed the Quality of Life in Bipolar Disorder (QoL-BD) scale, the Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS-11), and the Positive Urgency Measure (PUM). Participants were also assessed for comorbid DSM-IV diagnoses of anxiety, substance use, and impulse control disorders. RESULTS: Several subscales of the BIS-11 as well as the PUM total score were significantly negatively correlated with overall QoL. PUM total score remained a significant predictor of QoL after controlling for comorbid anxiety, substance use, and impulse control disorders. After controlling for impulsivity, comorbid disorders were no longer significantly related to overall QoL. CONCLUSIONS: The data support the hypothesis that impulsivity, specifically positive urgency, is highly correlated with QoL in BD. Impulsivity was found to mediate the relation between QoL and several comorbidities in BD. Interventions targeting impulsivity might help to improve QoL in BD.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".